Another Glaring Factual Discrepency in the Quran

[barnasha]

You are lapsing back into assertions which I have previously refuted, to which you did not answer, in asserting that Islam says physical abuse of your spouse (male or female) is ok.

The woman claimed she was mistreated and showed a bruise.

The man said she lied.

Who was telling the truth in this instance?

You say the woman, implicitly saying the man was lying.

Are you right?

Well, it would be most convenient for you if the woman was not lying, so that is what you will believe.

Whatever makes Islam look bad, you will try to use it, that shows the desperation to which you sink in trying to lambast the religion.

In fact it is people who make these mistakes, all or the major world religions teach people to be good, and when some people screw that up, people like you have the audacity to blame the very traditions that tried to help people become better.

Shame on you for blaming those who taught people to be more peaceful instead of the ones who are actually doing the harm to each other.

[Dan Zebiri]

SHAME on YOU - barney-boy, for being the blind and inordinate Islamophile that you are...!

I have NO DESPERATION WHATSOEVER...:-)

Your Quran DOES TEACH WIFE-BEATING AND VIOLENCE TO muslim wives by their husbands.

You never refuted me on these points - if you thought so - THEN sad to say - you are grosslY MISTAKEN!

IF, - BIG IF - the Quran never taught wife-beating - then the Muslim suthorities, Ulemas of Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei and Singapore WILL NEVER include a module on "HOW TO BEAT YOUR MUSLIM WIFE PROPERLY", in their Islamic pre-marital counselling sessions!

I can hardly regard you as authoritative as these thousands of scholarly, learned Muslim minds taken together...ARE YOU?? I am trying very hard not to laugh here!!

They ALL ENDORSE THE FACT THAT THE QURAN TEACHES WIFE-BEATING! And they teach THAT to their muslim MEN BEFORE THEY ALL GET MARRIED TO THEIR WIVES-TO BE!

SHAME ON YOU- barny...!! Shame on you!! Trying to defend an Islamic teaching that cannot be defended logically or sensibly, and is out of date with the times completely..!

You live in the WEST - where the Enlightenment ideas consider acts like Wife-beating totally ATROCIOUS and an ATROCITY! And is thus rejected!

Whereas HERE in the Muslim EAST, where Islam is the order of the day...! Wife Beating IS PERFECTLY NORMAL AND REQUIRED TO BE CARRIED OUT, as per its Quranic injunction in sura 4/34!

It is NOT an atrocity by any means - it MUST be practised by faithful MUSLIM men and women- THAT IS the husbands and their wives...!!

So, Barn, stop trying to hoodwink the non-muslims here again, by denying the truth and facts about Wife-beating that is ENJOINED BY THE ISLAMIC QURAN!.

Maybe the westerners whom you live close to, can be bluffed by your words...! You succedded to pull the islamic SPIN-Wool to cover the truth from their eyes...!!

BUT the Muslims whom I engage with everyday, are LAUGHING AT YOUR FACILE DENIALS OF WIFE-BEATING IN ISLAM.. AND they include learned Islamic ulemas and scholars.

Wake up Barney, I live in the Islamic world, and I would know better - much better than you...

Wasalaam, Dan.

[barnasha]

I noticed that you did not deny the fact that you are still making arguments relying on points which have already been refuted, which you refuse to address.

[Dan Zebiri]

Well if you insist, then, YES, I do deny those points your raised to 'reinterprete' Wife-beating as taught and enjoined in sura 4/34.

Do you deny the facts I pointed out that in Muslim countries, muslims practise wife-beating as a perfectly normal thing up to this very day - as taught by the Quran ?

Dan.

I noticed that you did not deny the fact that you are still making arguments relying on points which have already been refuted, which you refuse to address.

[barnasha]

Well if you insist, then, YES, I do deny those points your raised to 'reinterprete' Wife-beating as taught and enjoined in sura 4/34.

Do you deny the facts I pointed out that in Muslim countries, muslims practise wife-beating as a perfectly normal thing up to this very day - as taught by the Quran ?

Dan.

You, with your history of anti-Islamic propaganda, are the least qualified to assert as "fact" what the Quran teaches or does not teach.

All of my friends who grew up in Muslim countries finds such treatment of women abhorrent (as do my friends who did not), in fact I find they treat their wives with even more respect than those who grew up in secular and Christian countries.

I'm sure if you were standing face to face with us you wouldn't make such hurtful and ignorant comments.

[Dan Zebiri]

Now you confirm your really inordinate islamophilia indeed...!

Take the so-called 'ignorant statements' in this thread and show them to the tens of thousands of islamic scholars and ulema in Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei and Singapore.

Who have already issued fatwas and almost unanimous Consensus endorsing the actual and literal practice of wife-beating AS instructed and enjoined by the Quran in sura 4/34. Putting it into actual systematic teaching Modules in Pre-Marital courses for muslim couples in these muslim-majority countries (except Singapore).

Just going by the fundamental islamic principle of Ijmak (consensus), your pitiful and pretentious re-interpretation of sura 4/34 (as not wife-beating)is already defeated and bull-dozed a dozen times over by the tens of thousands of muslim ulema in the far-eastern world of islam, who say that wife-beating is ACTUALLY NORMAL in Islamic society, and EXPECTED by sura 4/34.

You just have lost your credibility, barn, in the light of what these really learned muslim ulema/scholars have confirmed!

Dan.

[barnasha]

Can you cite an "opinion" (fatwa) concerning "wife beating" and show us how it is in any way relevant to Islam?

Your post consists of largely circular reasoning (if there is any reasoning, and it is not just a list of assertions), saying essentially "It is true that Islam condones... because people condone it..." which is dubiously vague.

[Mountain Man]

If you read Sura 7 carefully Dan, you would realize the deceptions you ignorantly promote are fallacious.

Here are the 9 signs for you Danny boy!!!

106. (Pharaoh) said: "If indeed thou hast come with a Sign, show it forth,- if thou tellest the truth."

107. Then (Moses) threw his rod, and behold! it was a serpent, plain (for all to see)! (ONE)

108. And he drew out his hand, and behold! it was white to all beholders! (TWO)

130. We punished the people of Pharaoh with famine (THREE) and shortness of crops (FOUR); that they might receive admonition.

133. So We sent (plagues) on them: Wholesale death (FIVE), Locusts (SIX), Lice (SEVEN), Frogs (EIGHT), And Blood (NINE): Signs openly self-explained: but they were steeped in arrogance,- a people given to sin.

I'm a little late to the party, but I have to ask: could "famine and shortness of crops" really be meaningfully separated? Isn't "shortness of crops" just another way of saying "famine" (defined as "a drastic, wide-reaching food shortage" according to the dictionary)? Thus, it would seem that if there is a discrepancy, it's the fact that the text says there were 9 signs but lists only 8. Of course you have to separate "famine" and "shortness of crops" if you're trying for that magic number 9, but that strikes me as a bit of a stretch.

Just thought I'd mention it. Carry on.

[barnasha]

I'm a little late to the party, but I have to ask: could "famine and shortness of crops" really be meaningfully separated? Isn't "shortness of crops" just another way of saying "famine" (defined as "a drastic, wide-reaching food shortage" according to the dictionary)? Thus, it would seem that if there is a discrepancy, it's the fact that the text says there were 9 signs but lists only 8. Of course you have to separate "famine" and "shortness of crops" if you're trying for that magic number 9, but that strikes me as a bit of a stretch.

Just thought I'd mention it. Carry on.

really all the counting is irrelevant since the meaning of the story has nothing to do with the *number of* problems, but that there were many.

[Mountain Man]

really all the counting is irrelevant since the meaning of the story has nothing to do with the *number of* problems, but that there were many.

So is this your way of agreeing that the passage does appear to contain a contradiction?

And if the number is irrelevant then why specify 9 plagues/signs?

[barnasha]

So is this your way of agreeing that the passage does appear to contain a contradiction?

no

And if the number is irrelevant then why specify 9 plagues/signs?

It doesn't, does it?

[Dan Zebiri]

Your ignorance AND/OR shallow thinking and/or knowledge of islam is again proven in your words, or else, you are merely trying to spin more islamophilic wool to put over our eyes again, desperate barnasha!

I have done better than what you asked ALREADY!

The muslims would have never used consensus or Ijmak as a fundamental tool to correctly interprete the Quranic teachings into pragmatic application IF (BIG IF) they went by YOUR MODE of reasoning...!

And they DON'T anyway. So Ijmak/Consensus IS a valid islamic method to determine the precise application of what the Quran enjoins.

THE FACTS that the islamic and muslim Ulemas here in the worlds most populous nation - Indonesia as well as in Malaysia, teach Wife-beating and how to beat muslim wives properly, in their marital counselling Courses, DEMOLISHES your pet theory and re-inerpretation of Sura 4/34 - that no beating takes place, or it is only with a 'hankerchief' or 'tooth-brush'

These Islamic ULEMAS & marital counsellors are extremely SERIOUS to state and insist that the Quran teaches that the beating must take place, with the Muslim husband using HIS HANDS, and TO BEAT HIS WIFE ONLY ON THE BUTTOCKS AND/OR THE THIGHS and not on her face.

No Mention anywhere about beating her with ridiculous thigs like toothbrushes or handkerchiefs...THIS IS MERELY YOUR SPINNING DECEPTION TO COVER UP THIS ISLAMIC PRACTICE as clearly instructed and REQUIRED BY THE QURAN -your holy book!

Give it up, barney boy, wife-beating IS CLEARLY PERFECTLY NORMAL IN ISLAM! Why are you shy to admit THIS FACT! Why flog a dead horse...??

Your inordinate ISLAMOPHILIA, of course, which has blinded you to the real truth and makes you try and deceive us here as well!

Wasalaam, Dan.

Can you cite an "opinion" (fatwa) concerning "wife beating" and show us how it is in any way relevant to Islam?

Your post consists of largely circular reasoning (if there is any reasoning, and it is not just a list of assertions), saying essentially "It is true that Islam condones... because people condone it..." which is dubiously vague.

[Mountain Man]

It doesn't, does it?

Really? So you're saying that Dan Zebiri was incorrect when he quoted the following passages?

Surah 27/012 : "Now put thy hand into thy bosom, and it will come forth white without stain (or harm): (these are) among the nine Signs (thou wilt take) to Pharaoh and his people: for they are a people rebellious in transgression."

Surah 17/101 : To Moses We did give Nine Clear Signs: As the Children of Israel: when he came to them, Pharaoh said to him: "O Moses! I consider thee, indeed, to have been worked upon by sorcery!

This is not a rhetorical question, by the way. I'm really not familiar with the Quran, and I'd be willing to accept that there is not a contradiction here if a reasonable explanation is provided.

[barnasha]

Really? So you're saying that Dan Zebiri was incorrect when he quoted the following passages?

This is not a rhetorical question, by the way. I'm really not familiar with the Quran, and I'd be willing to accept that there is not a contradiction here if a reasonable explanation is provided.

so out of the story, you (plural) are coming away with the question of why does it seem like 9 signs when 2 of the signs are so similar? that's a perfectly acceptable question to ask, but it seems like such a superficial take... like telling Aesop "why did the rabbit speak using human words when speaking to the tortoise"?

at any rate, if it counted drought (shortage of water) and shortage of fruits (crops) to be ONE SIGN, and then enumerated them as 8, what difference would it make?

remember that crops can be horded and still be used during a drought... as Jacob did with the grain in Egypt

not to mention the two events can be chronologically distinct


i would prefer not to talk about such miniscule details, when the meaning of the text when read in a proper context is so much more rich and interesting.

[barnasha]

Your ignorance AND/OR shallow thinking and/or knowledge of islam is again proven in your words, or else, you are merely trying to spin more islamophilic wool to put over our eyes again, desperate barnasha!

I have done better than what you asked ALREADY!

The muslims would have never used consensus or Ijmak as a fundamental tool to correctly interprete the Quranic teachings into pragmatic application IF (BIG IF) they went by YOUR MODE of reasoning...!

And they DON'T anyway. So Ijmak/Consensus IS a valid islamic method to determine the precise application of what the Quran enjoins.

THE FACTS that the islamic and muslim Ulemas here in the worlds most populous nation - Indonesia as well as in Malaysia, teach Wife-beating and how to beat muslim wives properly, in their marital counselling Courses, DEMOLISHES your pet theory and re-inerpretation of Sura 4/34 - that no beating takes place, or it is only with a 'hankerchief' or 'tooth-brush'

beating of children is perfectly permissible in USA, my mom did it with a wooden paddle.

"but that's not beating" you may say, but the verb in arabic used is the same one you are trying to twist to take on a connotation of an ENGLISH word, 'to beat'.

the consensus (ijma' - no k) of the scholars is to treat women as the prophet taught them to treat women - never to physically harm them or even disrespect them!

if you have a source to the contrary kindly provide it for the benefit of this discussion

thank you